bukie

Oddly, yes. What's even stranger is that the NFC is significantly better than the AFC this year, efficiency-wise. Baltimore, Tennessee, Pittsburgh and Indy are the only 4 AFC teams in the upper half of the spectrum. Possibly Miami, too, after last week. The AFC East's performance is suspect due to hilariously easy scheduling (because of how bad the AFC and NFC west divisions are).

I don't think the Bears will be winning any playoff games if they win the division. Just sayin' Yeah, it's not like they could ever play an NFC playoff team close like Carolina, Atlanta, Tampa, Philly, or Minnesota. At this point in the season? The Offense hasn't showed much of anything in about 4-5 weeks. Frustratingly enough, its only been recently that the defense has shown that it even cares, I guess we can never get a full season of good play out of all 53 players. So yeah, I agree unironically with what you said (I blame Ron Turner for everything) The Bears are not a bad team, or even an inconsistent team. Their overall variance is 6th overall, meaning they've been a very consistent team week in, week out. They beat Philly earlier in the year when they were slightly outplayed. They should've beat Atlanta in Atlanta earlier in the year when they slightly outplayed them. They outplayed Carolina in week 2 only to fall apart in the 4th quarter. They outplayed Tampa and fell apart the last two minutes. Heck, they outplayed New Orleans through 3 quarters and let them back into that game, too. Outside the Giants, the only team that really outclasses the Bears is the Eagles.

I don't think the Bears will be winning any playoff games if they win the division. Just sayin' Yeah, it's not like they could ever play an NFC playoff team close like Carolina, Atlanta, Tampa, Philly, or Minnesota.

Crazy scenario...there's a decent chance that if the Bears win the division, their road to the Super Bowl could involve a home January game vs. Tampa, a road game against a #2 seed Atlanta team, and a home NFC championship game with Carolina. This scenario could play out if Tampa beats Oakland, Atlanta beats St. Louis, and Carolina loses at NO.

This statement loses a lot of meaning when it gets said 2-3 years in a row. Our mascot can dance whenever he wants. Illinois doesn't have a mascot. They have an I

Still a ton of playoff possibilities up in the air, and a ton of meaningful games. Games that matter for both teams (well, probably): Miami at NY Jets 4:15 PM CBS Dallas at Philadelphia 4:15 PM FOX Denver at San Diego 8:15 PM NBC Games that matter for one team: St. Louis at Atlanta 1:00 PM FOX New England at Buffalo 1:00 PM CBS NY Giants at Minnesota 1:00 PM FOX Carolina at New Orleans 1:00 PM FOX Oakland at Tampa Bay 1:00 PM CBS Chicago at Houston 1:00 PM FOX Jacksonville at Baltimore 4:15 PM CBS Meaningless games: Kansas City at Cincinnati 1:00 PM CBS Detroit at Green Bay 1:00 PM FOX Tennessee at Indianapolis 1:00 PM CBS Cleveland at Pittsburgh 1:00 PM CBS Washington at San Francisco 4:15 PM FOX Seattle at Arizona 4:15 PM FOX Playoff outlook: AFC: - Tennessee has clinched the 1 seed. - Pittsburgh has clinched the 2 seed. - AFC East winner gets the 3 seed. - Denver/San Diego winner gets the 4 seed. - Indy gets the 5 seed. Up for grabs -- AFC East: - If Miami beats the NY Jets, Miami wins the AFC East. - If the Jets beat Miami and New England beats Buffalo, New England wins the AFC East. - If the Jets beat Miami and New England loses to Buffalo, the Jets win the AFC East. Up for grabs -- AFC 6 seed: - If Baltimore beast Jacksonville, Baltimore is the 6 seed. - If Baltimore loses, New England wins, and Miami wins, New England is the 6 seed. - If Baltimore loses, New England wins and the Jets win, the Jets are the 6 seed. - If Baltimore loses, New England wins and Miami-NY Jets tie, Miami is the 6 seed. NFC: - The NY Giants have clinched the 1 seed. - NFC South winner gets the 2 seed. - NFC North winner gets the 3 seed (Minnesota wins tiebreaker with Arizona if both finish 9-7, Chicago can't win division at 9-7). - Arizona has clinched the 4 seed. - Atlanta and Carolina have clinched playoff spots. Up for grabs -- NFC South: - If Carolina beats or ties New Orleans or Atlanta loses to St. Louis, Carolina wins the South and gets the 2 seed. - If Atlanta beats St. Louis and Carolina loses to New Orleans, Atlanta wins the South and gets the 2 seed. Up for grabs -- NFC North: - If Minnesota beats or ties the NY Giants or Chicago loses to Houston, Minnesota wins the North and gets the 3 seed. - If Chicago beats Houston and Minnesota loses to the NY Giants, Chicago wins the North and gets the 3 seed. Up for grabs -- last playoff spot: - If Dallas beats Philadelphia, Dallas clinches the last playoff spot. - If Tampa Bay beats Oakland and Dallas loses or ties, Tampa gets the last playoff spot. (There are some really convoluted scenarios with Tampa that involves 3+ ties, not going to happen..basically they win 3-way tiebreakers involving Dallas and Minnesota, but lose 3-way tiebreakers involving Dallas and Chicago) - If Chicago beats Houston and Tampa Bay loses or ties and Dallas loses or ties and Minnesota wins, Chicago clinches the last playoff spot. - If Minnesota ties the NY Giants, Chicago wins, and Dallas and Tampa lose, Minnesota gets the last playoff spot. - If Philadelphia beats Dallas, and Tampa and either Chicago or Minnesota lose, Philadelphia gets the last playoff spot.

It wasn't even an upset either. It was one of the two games against small conference teams that IU fans thought they had a good chance of losing (they managed to survive Cornell). IU is probably going to win their last non-conference game, but I have a tough time seeing them winning a single conference game with the huge gap between them and everyone else in the conference. Odds are on their side that they'll win at least one game over the 18-game schedule, but they certainly won't be favored to win any.

What about the horrible waste of a timeout towad the end. They were indecicive about going for it, then tried to change personel, then had to take a timeout when the play clock ran out. It was a sign of a poorly coached team, which the Bears are. I thought that was a GB timeout before the FG at the end. Or am I thinking of a different play?

The only things that really annoyed me from last night were the Bears punting from the Packer 33 yard line in the first quarter, and Lovie wasting yet another challenge on an obvious inconclusive play.

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it. I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score. It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player. It's a dumb rule, because theoretically the defensive team can keep batting the ball forward until they decide to stop the ball at the 1, no?

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it. I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

I think the Philly, NO and GB games just about make up for the Carolina, Tampa, and Atlanta games earlier in the year. It all balances out.

Yeah, the Bears would get blown out if they ever had to play the Panthers, Bucs, Falcons or Vikings...

Punting from the opponents' 33 yard line is a slightly worse idea than challenging that punt bounce.

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two. Agree with some of it,but some is off I think, but that's a pretty cool ranking system The main drawback to this and Ken Pomeroy's system (http://www.kenpom.com) is that it's still early enough in the season that a blowout or two in either direction can really affect the overall standing of a team. As the season progresses, the systems get more and more accurate.

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

Wow you see I really dont get the point to a post like this. First of all where is the reasoning to say you would rather have Pie out there than Anderson. Looking at Anderson's numbers the past few years they're pretty much average numbers. What in the world has Pie done for the Cubs to make you think he would be better than anderson out there. I'm a big Pie fan and still feel he has potential but i'm not dumb enough to say i'd rather have him than anderson. By no means am i saying that the cubs should sign him because i'd prefer them not too but then again I wouldn't be mad if they signed him to a cheap contract. I'm pretty sure the same idiots posting those smartass remarks are the same ones who said "oh good no", "Sign Gaetti" when the cubs ended up signing Edmonds and how did that work out. Just because the guys is old doesn't mean he can't be of some use, its not the cubs would be signing him to a multiyear deal. Pie has potential, Anderson had production. Pie makes the league minimum, Anderson would cost several million. Anderson would be a signing that makes no sense at any level. Pie at least makes sense monetarily and with the hope of the type of production he's actually had in the minors given regular time in the majors.

For a more stat-oriented POV, here's the top 25 according to Sagarin's predictor (and some of this will look weird, but it has a lot to do with performance vs. perception): 1. North Carolina 2. Duke 3. Gonzaga 4. Pittsburgh 5. Georgetown 6. West Virginia 7. Connecticut 8. Kansas 9. Clemson 10. Purdue 11. Oklahoma 12. Louisville 13. Missouri 14. Memphis 15. Ohio State 16. Tennessee 17. Xavier 18. UCLA 19. Kansas State 20. Texas 21. BYU 22. Illinois 23. Notre Dame 24. Villanova 25. Davidson Other notables: Wake Forest 26, Syracuse 29, Arizona State 30, Michigan State 32, Baylor 34, Marquette 57

Coaches have no idea what's going on outside of the teams in their conference and on their schedule, for the most part, at least until March. Plus, the ones that do know what's going on will consistently rank teams from their own conference higher than average in an effort to boost perception of the conference.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams. Yeah that makes no sense though... It's a popular vote by coaches (assistants?) and media. Legacy and televised games will tend to dominate the mindset of those type of crowds.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams.

Or the Bears tonight, one of those.

Could you explain who would be decent, just curious? Most any of the writers from BP, BA, and the rest of the SABR community. Neyer's been writing analytically for years about baseball, and his admittance is long overdue.

Oh right, Baylor is good now. That will take some getting used to.

Arizona beat Gonzaga, and they're Arizona. Stanford is Stanford, and beat...Northwestern, I guess?